By Eric Bloch

IF it had actually been government’s intent to bring the economy to its knees it could not conceivably have done so as successfully as it has. In fact, government has such a spectacular record of doing the wrong things to negate whatsoever it is trying to achieve, that one almost wishes that it had decided upon a policy of economic destruction because, if it had done so, the economy would undoubtedly be one of the world’s most resounding successes, with an economic strength that would be the envy of the US, China, the European Union, and others.

After the economy had commenced a dramatic, positive turnaround during the three and a half years from early 1994, when the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (Esap) was belatedly embarked upon with some conviction, after a prior three years of lip-service to the programme, without action, the government’s destruction of the economy commenced. Many have blamed Esap for Zimbabwe’s economic ills and still do so, but the facts (that those who scathingly castigate Esap steadfastly deny), were that inflation fell to about a quarter of prior levels, numbers in employment increased, there was considerable new investment, both domestic and foreign exchange rates stabilised and balance of payments improved, and much else.

Since the latter part of 1997 the economy has been in never-ending decline. Government has unhesitatingly attributed the economic regression to adverse climatic conditions, to evil machinations of the western world, to the diabolical acts of government’s opponents, and to many others. At no time has it admitted to any culpability for the ruination of an economy which had previously been undergoing significant upturn. Wholly irrelevant, in the view of government, was the payout of compensation to war veterans (including thousands of impostors), which largesse was far beyond the means of the state. That irresponsible act triggered an immense devaluation (since which time the president has been a vigorous opponent of currency devaluation, even when economically necessary). In turn, that devaluation initiated a pronounced return to untenably high inflation.

Then government, in order to appease a populace oppressed by the downward slide of the economy, belatedly embarked upon the land reform programme, but did so in a catastrophically disastrous manner which destroyed agriculture as the very foundation of the economy, rendered 300 000 unemployed, nearly two million homeless and without income, and undermined all confidence within the investment community.

Concurrently, government has been endlessly spending that which it does not have, in a horrendously profligate manner, causing a gargantuan, unsustainable, national debt. Moreover, it allowed corruption to prevail unabated, demonstrated an intensifying contempt for the fundamental principles of law and order, with a matching disregard for human rights, and whilst pretending otherwise, abandoned the precepts of democracy (evident in many ways, including the oppressive Aippa and Posa legislation).

The consequence was that Zimbabwe fell into gross disfavour with much of the international community, retaining uninhibited friendship and support of only those who were of like autocratic and lawless mind.

Over a period of nearly nine years the economy has continuously deteriorated, reducing to little more than half of its previous size. With its usual misrepresentative skills, government continuously suggests that the decline is not of the massive magnitude that is in fact the case. A prime example of such governmental deception was a recent announcement that unemployment was 9% of the employable population, whereas it is indisputable that the reality is very different. Reliable data is not available, but authoritative sources place unemployment at over 80% of the employable population. (In order to arrive at its spurious, derisory statistic, government has presumably excluded from the number of the employable population all those who, being unemployed, are now actively engaged within the informal sector.)

At the same time government keeps promising an economic turnaround. It has demonstrated great productivity in creating one economic recovery programme after another, the latest being the National Economic Development Priority Programme (NEDPP) which, like most of its predecessor programmes is a skilled generation by government of a tautologous blueprint for economic change virtually devoid of substance. Essentially, it contains no stratagems which are to bring about the targeted economic revival, other than the creation of a bevy of committees, euphemistically called "task forces".

The composition of those committees is by government’s selection and invitation, with only superficial consideration to comprehensive representation from all relevant components of the respective economic sectors. And government’s real colours were clearly shown when the deputy Minister of Finance, David Chapfika addressed the business conference at the 2006 Zimbabwe International Trade Fair. He said that the success of NEDPP was dependent upon the private sector "buying into it" and ensuring its success. Clearly, he was establishing government’s escape route if NEDPP has the same fate as did the First Five Year Transitional Development Programme, the Five Year National Development Programme, the Programme for Social and Economic Transformation, the Millennium Economic Recovery Programme, the New Economic Recovery Programme and numerous other failures.

What the deputy minister did not suggest, with conviction, is that government would be "buying in" to NEDPP with determination. Even worse is that the first weeks of NEDPP have demonstrated that it is not doing so. Farm invasions continue unabated, devastating what little is left of agriculture, and the Minister of Agriculture Joseph Made continues to enunciate mythical projections of harvest sizes. Government continues to resist and hinder the greatly overdue devaluation of the Zimbabwean dollar, resulting in almost all exporters losing all operational viability and reduced to the brink of closure. State expenditure on unaffordable, and unnecessary aircraft and other weaponry for the defence forces continues "willy-nilly", and the military are assuming ever-greater economic controls. Government continues to threaten investment expropriation, the current target being the mining sector.

And yet there are also signs of some moderated policy changes on the part of government, wheresoever those changes can be effected without being seen as an acknowledgement that past policies were wrong. As yet, the changes are few and far between, including invitations to white commercial farmers to apply for 99-year land leases, and discreet overtures to the international community for reconciliation.

Dumisani Ndlela

THERE is no doubt the tourism sector provides the most spectacular frustrations to a chief executive officer running a tourism-based company under Zimbabwe’s present economic conditions.

But Chipo Mtasa, group chief executive of the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE)-listed Rainbow Tourism Group (RTG), has a will of steel.

For a job presenting an adrenaline rush that could easily throw into the lurch even those with the finesse required of any tourism operation, her exploits are quite daring.

RTG, a perennial loss-maker whose woes had been made even more poignant by the loss of international tourist traffic because of the negative perception on the country, has finally turned around the corner to profitability, recording an operating profit of $24 billion for the year to December 2005, from a $455 million loss the previous year.

"It’s not easy," says Mtasa, who took over as RTG’s CEO from Herbert Nkala towards the end of 2004. "It’s a constant look at our margin," she says, brooding over the question about the sustainability of profitability in a troubled market environment.

Obviously, she is not the faint-hearted type that easily throws in the towel when confronted with tough decisions.

However, she admits the issue of negative perception affecting Zimbabwe’s tourism sector has to be quickly dealt with.

"Perceptions do worry us," says Mtasa, matter-of-factly. "Something will have to happen to change (negative) perception on the country."

Last year, Zimbabwe experienced a 16% decline in tourist arrivals against arrivals recorded the previous year.

In her report accompanying financial statements for the year to December 2005, Mtasa says hotel occupancies remained depressed at 38% compared to 43% the previous year.

The tourism sector, she says, had been hit hard by low domestic demand due to weak macro-economic conditions, negative perceptions about the country in major source markets and limited direct international flights into the country.

A number of airlines have abandoned routes into the country because of the economic crisis, characterised by acute foreign currency and fuel shortages.

But, more significant is the fact that neighbouring Zambia and South Africa have benefited immensely from Zimbabwe’s losses.

Zambia’s tourist arrivals are on an upward spiral, gaining from Zimbabwe’s five-year losses as tourists shun the southern African country troubled by its worst ever economic crisis since Independence in 1980.

South Africa is aggressively taking advantage of the poor fortunes of its northern neighbour by marketing the Victoria Falls resort, attracting visitors who would otherwise have come to Zimbabwe to watch one of the world’s seven wonders.

When visitors to the Victoria Falls come through South Africa, they only fly for a few hours into the country without spending on hotel and other costs in Zimbabwe, depriving the country of much-needed foreign currency receipts.

The number of tourists visiting Zambia has more than quadrupled over the last five years, improving revenues from the sector to well over US$150 million as tourists now prefer to visit Zambia instead of Zimbabwe.

Already, Zambia’s Ministry of Tourism has embarked on a campaign to increase tourist numbers, and is aiming at reaching an annual tourist arrival figure of one million visitors per year.

A total of 610 109 tourists visited Zambia in 2004, with the figure expected to be high for 2005. This compared to about 160 000 tourist arrivals in Zambia before Zimbabwe’s tourism industry began suffering due to the political and economic crisis.

To tap into Zambia’s booming tourism sector, Mtasa says RTG is currently in the process of registering a tour operations office in Zambia’s Livingstone town, which also provides a view of the Falls.

Domestically, RTG has, against the backdrop of an acute economic crisis, inevitably felt the pinch in the tourism sector and embarked on a multi-billion dollar programme upgrading the group’s hotels and lodges, as well as boosting the bus fleet for subsidiary, Tourism Services Zimbabwe, whose head office was relocated from Harare to the resort town to improve operational efficiencies.

There are plans to add more buses to the current fleet run by Tourism Services Zimbabwe.

Mtasa stunned the market this year when she announced that Sheraton Hotel & Towers would be branded Rainbow Towers Hotel.

The obvious fear from a curious market was the marketability of the new brand; Sheraton Hotels had performed favourably well due to the fact that it was an international brand with international linkages that helped attract global traffic, especially through the Starwood privileges associated with Sheraton’s worldwide operations.

Mtasa says she is upbeat about the prospects of the new brand, and that costs of maintaining the Sheraton brand had become a haemorrhage on the group’s bottom line under present economic circumstances because of foreign currency denominated fee payments for the brand.

With the right management team in place, she believes Rainbow Towers Hotel will maintain, or even surpass, current performance.

Although she refuses to discuss the issue at a delicate stage of negotiations, businessdigest has been reliably informed that a restructuring of management has already taken place at Rainbow Towers Hotel, with only the general manager and marketing manager’s positions yet to be filled.

She has reportedly managed to get an international hotelier from outside the country to take up the post of general manager, and the post is expected to have been filled by the time RTG launches the new Rainbow Towers brand around August.

"International clients are still coming," says Mtasa. "It’s not just loyalty, we’re offering valuable services and it’s a place they can do business while visiting."

While she admits having lost the Starwood privileges after divesting the Sheraton brand, Mtasa believes they can counter that with improved services and other packages.

"As we go into the future, we’ll look for linkages with international (hotel) chains that can give our clients access to other products," she says.

"We’re conscious of the need to add international market linkages while maintaining our identity. We’ll not compromise on that; we want to maintain our high profile market clientele."

She adds: "Our brands should be known and it doesn’t happen overnight. We’ll adopt an aggressive approach in our marketing."

RTG has refurbished the Bulawayo Rainbow Hotels at a cost of $40 billion, and spent $7 billion on soft furnishings for the Ambassador Hotel in Harare.

Other hotels and lodges under the group are also earmarked for major refurbishments.

The group operates 10 hotels and lodges across the country, with a presence in key resort areas.

"The (upgrading) process is continuing," says Mtasa. Because of funding constraints, these would be undertaken in a phased process.

But the logic of such investments is lost to investors when this is judged on the basis of dwindling tourist arrivals.

"We cannot hold our hands and give up. We’re taking a futuristic approach," says Mtasa, cognisant of a host of difficulties militating against the industry.

"When the numbers come back, we want to be competitive and take advantage of the market," she says.

I WRITE in response to a letter by Musekiwa Makwanya, "A meeting with Arthur evinces a better verdict", (Zimbabwe Independent, May 19), in which he argued that the MDC pro-senate faction led by Arthur Mutambara provides a better alternative to that led by the founding president, Morgan Tsvangirai.

Makwanya is now based in London and we both know each other from Zimbabwe.

I first knew Makwanya in 2000 when we met at the Zimbabwe National Students’ Union (Zinasu) congress at the Catholic Centre in Chikanga, Mutare.

The student delegates attending the congress took issue with Makwanya and his colleagues, accusing them of being members of the ruling Zanu PF who had invited Justice minister Patrick Chinamasa to speak without the approval of Zinasu.

I do not wish to comment about the merits of allegations of being a member of Zanu PF levelled against him then.

Makwanya does not, however, tell readers that he himself is a member of the pro-senate faction, having organised and chaired the London meeting on May 9.

In his letter, Makwanya creates the impression that he is neutral in terms of the way he approaches the split in the MDC.

The London meeting was not smooth as portrayed by the author. Makwanya does not explain that the people who attended the Mutambara meeting took issue with what they called "arrogance" and the lies people are fed that the MDC faction led by Tsvangirai is the only party that has been on a violent streak.

People asked the pro-senate delegation why they continuously seek to discredit Tsvangirai on the basis of his level of education, yet they have in their ranks the likes of vice-president Gibson Sibanda and Priscilla Misihairabwi-Mushonga.

The meeting turned into chaos as some people took Mutambara to task with regards to his perceived arrogance and the fact that he thinks he is the "Messiah" that all Zimbabweans have been waiting for.

One speaker said: "If you have gravitas and intelligence, why are you holding on to what Tsvangirai formed? Why don’t you leave Tsvangirai alone and form your own party, different from the MDC?"

The other intervention came from Pedzisayi Ruhanya who argued that the pro-senate faction had lost the plot because of concentrating on wrong issues such as the question of ideology.

Mutambara was reminded that the problem in Zimbabwe was not that the MDC lacked an ideology as it was founded on the basis of advancing social democracy anchored on three pillars — justice, equality and freedom.

The London meeting disagreed with Mutambara that Tsvangirai lost the elections in 2000, 2002 and 2005.

It was felt that other senior members such as Welshman Ncube, Paul Themba Nyathi and Sibanda should share the "collective responsibility" for the loss.

Ruhanya, a former Daily News deputy news editor and student of human rights law at Essex University, argued that during his time at the now defunct paper, he covered stories exposing acts of murder, arson, rape and massive intimidation perpetrated by Zanu PF.

He specifically mentioned areas such as Mberengwa in the Midlands province where one Big Chitoro wreaked havoc and Buhera where Talent Mabika and Tichaona Chiminya were murdered in cold blood by known, but still free, state operatives.

UK.

Wish they were all like VP Mujuru

By Joram Nyathi

ONE cannot help but admire Vice-President Joice Mujuru’s stamina and the passion with which she has assumed her controversial role as vice-president.

I think in the short period she has been VP, she has seen more of Zimbabwe than has President Mugabe in 26 years. I am talking about seeing the country with her own eyes. The few occasions when Mugabe has been known to travel to far-flung rural areas, it has been to address rallies or lately, to donate computers. That does not allow you time to see the world with your own eyes, and the real problems that people are facing.

On the other hand, Mujuru has been launching or inspecting a number of developmental projects from Chipinge to Matabeleland North and across from Mt Darwin to Matabeleland South.

There is another difference between Mujuru and Mugabe in addition to her hands-on approach. During her tour of the country we have been spared the usual angry rhetoric about the British and the MDC and the empty threats against multiple-farmowners.

Where Mugabe would use threats, so far Mujuru has been appealing to the conscience of those who have seized farms that they are not using. Most of them have dared Mugabe to carry out his threats by simply ignoring him since July 2003 and nothing has happened.

I doubt that Mujuru will achieve much in her efforts to encourage greater land utilisation but at least she is talking to the people rather talking at them. It will take time to fight the spirit of greed that the whole land reform programme has nurtured in the past seven years. And Mujuru is part of a government where rhetoric is never matched by action.

This is in part because everyone involved in the land grab orgy is so badly compromised none has the moral authority to call the other a thief.

I was therefore amazed when Mujuru made a passionate appeal last week for an end to all farming disruptions. She told a National Economic Consultative Forum conference in Harare: "For the avoidance of doubt, a policy of zero tolerance of farm disturbances will be implemented by law enforcement agencies. Zimbabwe has sufficient legal institutions and legal remedies to deal with any outstanding land ownership or utilisation disputes without disruptions."

But that is not the problem.

Zimbabwe has more than enough land for everyone who is genuinely interested in farming. What is lacking is a clear government policy for law enforcement agents to follow. This first became evident way back in 2002 when war veterans occupied a very productive farm in Mashonaland West.

VP Joseph Msika who was then acting president ordered the "rogue elements" out. Before the order could be executed President Mugabe returned to declare that he would not use force against his own people who needed land. He said the British had refused to use force to stop Ian Smith’s UDI.

From then on was born a new crime called "political" which was not covered in our statutes and therefore was beyond the power of the police. From then on one only needed the right connections in Zanu PF and the land would be yours.

That explains why nothing of substance has materialised from more than seven land audits that have been carried out since the destruction of commercial agriculture began in 1999.

Mujuru should have been alerted to this lack of government policy from the pleas Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono has been making to the authorities on the need for order on the farms to boost production and restore investor confidence. They have fallen on deaf ears. There are widespread disruptions at Triangle and Hippo Valley estates despite the shortage of sugar in the country. Foreign currency earning Kondozi Estate was ruined despite loud protests by VP Msika against "immoral little boys" who looted farm and irrigation equipment and motor vehicles in broad daylight.

Mujuru has been given the names of some of the "looters" but there has been no action.

I am also happy that Mujuru is confirming for herself what we have been saying over the years, that most of the so-called beneficiaries of the land reform have absolutely no interest in farming. They went in there for the farm houses or what had already been planted. Once the harvest was over, they moved on to another property to plunder while the nation begs for food.

Speaking in the Midlands Province this week, Mujuru said those who were not interested in farming "should quit to make way for real farmers". As if to undermine that call, Didymus Mutasa, the minister responsible for resettlement and security, was saying the exact opposite. Newsnet quoted him in the same bulletin as Mujuru on Monday saying government would continue issuing offer letters.

He said those with offer letters "should be patient" if they find that the person on the farm has a crop. He should be allowed to harvest and then "move away".

Which is exactly what I mean by lack of a clear government policy which is creating confusion among law enforcement agencies. Why chase away somebody who is productive simply because he does not have an offer letter or a party card to make way for a person with no track record in farming? How do the police enforce the law when new offer letters are being issued at random six years down the line?

Until there is a clear policy and people feel that there are sufficient guarantees for investment in farming, we can kiss goodbye to food security. The risks to investors are too great. Even those who got the land for free don’t feel secure to invest their own money. Hence the endless appeals to government to provide assistance. If Mujuru’s presidential stamina could be directed towards a solid uniform policy perhaps we could start talking of agricultural recovery.

People like Mutasa are not giving any hint of such certainty. On the contrary, they are at the vortex of the chaos that bedevils a formerly productive nation.

THAT President Mugabe wants to hang on until 2010 is indisputable (Zimbabwe Independent, May 5). The situation is however becoming desperate for him now.

Those who have had the guts to indicate that he should have gone by 2008 are now growing in numbers.

His new argument is that Zimbabwe is in an economic difficulty that will make it unwise to hold two major elections in two years. Certainly, Zanu PF will not afford it and the combined elections are better off held in 2008 or 2010.

Typical of his manipulative tactics, he is banking on MPs (the term refers to both houses) being selfish and voting for serving their full terms.

Insiders have suggested to him that there is really only a year to go to the presidential election. Both the party and the government need to mobilise resources and time is running out.

Mugabe has put everything on hold, hoping that the decision to go in 2010 will be "natural" in view of the problems of holding a presidential election in 2008.

The senators in particular stand to lose if 2008 is election year for all. It would also mean that Mugabe will have to stand because time will be too short to sell a new candidate.

Meanwhile, Mugabe has started warming up to Emmerson Mnangagwa again, rather openly.

It is thought this is his way of sending a message to the Vice-President Joice Mujuru camp that they don’t have it in the bag as yet, and that he still has a say in what happens in the end.

The Mujuru camp is not lying idle either. The general has been doing his rounds, mobilising resources for the 2008 presidential election.

In her corner, among others, are Attorney-General Sobusa Gula-Ndebele and governors of Mashonaland Central, East and several ministers.

She has a grip on the central committee and an evenly split politburo.

CORRUPTION has been widely considered one of the main drawbacks of the Zimbabwean economy and the Prevention of Corruption Act justifiably seeks to provide for the prevention of this vice and the investigation of claims arising from dishonesty or corruption, among other matters.

It does not seek to fuel corruption in the process as seems to be the situation emanating from its implementation in Zimbabwe.

The Act empowers the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, or any other minister assigned by the president to administer it, to specify persons to be investigated for suspected corrupt practices.

In doing so, the minister is endowed with sweeping powers that include appointing a suitable person to conduct an investigation into suspected corrupt activities as specifically defined by the Act.

In appointing such investigators, the minister may appoint any member of the public service or any suitable person.

Clearly, the option to appoint a member of the public service has conspicuous benefits to the nation, considering that such a person is already on the government payroll and that their appointment will not invite an unnecessary
drain on our already stretched fiscus.

History however suggests that there is more to recent appointments of investigators than meets the eye.

To that end, I challenge the minister to explain why he has appointed Reggie Francis Saruchera of Camelsa Chartered Accountants as a preferred investigator in many specification assignments in the recent past.

Saruchera has been getting the nod ahead of other eligible investigators at a cost to the taxpayers.

Is this not fiscal indiscipline at its highest order?

What special skills does Saruchera command that other chartered accountants in Zimbabwe do not have?

Would the honourable minister concerned care to publicly justify his perennial choice of specification investigators?

Until then, I cannot rest my case.

Harare.

Our major failure

By Dumisani Muleya

I’M "renting" the Editor’s Memo column for this week because the landlord, Vincent Kahiya, is away. I usually do not like writing columns — even though I’m a columnist elsewhere — because of the demands and pitfalls associated with such pursuits.

I have just finished reading a book titled Biography of the Columnist and I found it very interesting. It’s a must-read for all columnists, in particular our local mandarins who write as if they specialise in how best to bore readers to tears.

It would have been good to write about columnists to show how most of them are just redundant but there are more compelling issues to deal with.

I have been watching with horror the dramatic deterioration in our social and economic conditions for the past six or seven years. What has really been surprising for me is not necessarily the unfolding national crisis — the drama and its actors — but how as citizens we have responded to the situation.

History bears important lessons for us on what we should do and what not to do in a badly poisoned political environment to resolve such a crisis. Doing nothing is one of the choices and we seem to have elected for it.

From the storming of the Bastille in Paris in 1789, through the Napoleonic wars, revolutions in Europe, two world wars, the Cold War, and right up to the Prague Spring in 1968 and the Velvet Revolution in the same country 21 years later there are many events for us to learn from. That includes the colonial and post-colonial era on our own continent.

Our neighbours South Africa and Zambia provide good case studies in what to do and what not to do to succeed or fail as a nation.

As the political and economic situation gets worse, the question is: what is to be done? None of our main political actors — government, Zanu PF, the MDC and civic society groups, seems to have a clue. They are all blank.

It is difficult to understand why Zimbabweans have so far been unable to do something about their plight. Instead we have heard a lot of whingeing and recriminations against foreign leaders who tried to help out by people — including the MDC –—who want to blame them for the situation in Zimbabwe.

President Thabo Mbeki in particular has been treated as if he is answerable to the Zimbabwean electorate. Such abdication of duty and self-denial catharsis is unhelpful.

This is why perhaps some people tend to agree with President Mugabe when he claims people are voting for him, therefore he is popular with the majority!

This really sounds like a cynical view but in the absence of a clear and convincing explanation on why people are unable to demonstrate their disapproval, it will continue to appeal to some — albeit a fringe minority. It’s not good enough to just say elections were rigged. What did you do after that? It’s also not useful to say there is repression and harsh laws. Some people have secured change in much more difficult conditions.

The threats of mass action by Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara are not helpful if they remain as dark threats. They have become idle political chatter for the amusement of a yet to be identified constituency.

But this is not Tsvangirai or Mutambara’s problem alone. The citizens are probably more culpable because they have given Mugabe a political blank cheque for 26 years.

We seem to have a collective-action problem in Zimbabwe. This has also perhaps led to the argument that currently the real opposition to Zanu PF is the economy.

The collective-action problem — any situation in which the uncoordinated actions of different players may not yield the best outcome desired — is one of the main reasons why people have not stood up to tyranny.

The lack of cohesion in the opposition and civil society helps to explain the debilitating national malaise. The prevailing political culture and dearth of strong independent social institutions and thinking are also causes of docility.

Patronage is another. There is also a more fundamental explanation to be found in historical institutionalism and the interface between our political and economic spheres. People are hardly able to resist tyranny in a sea of poverty. Those with something to lose usually push for change if their interests are under threat. Marxists say human history develops as a result of social-class contradictions.

It also appears some Zimbabweans like free-loading which is why instead of fighting for change back home they are busy quarrelling with foreign governments to be allowed to squeeze in as economic refugees. There are people who left the country on genuine grounds but not the majority.

What is needed to change the situation is a holistic and cohesive national effort — backed by sound policy and political programmes of action and a credible political leadership — rooted in the aspirations of the people, not those of power-mongers.

Is any of this realistic in the short-term? Don’t hold your breath!